Mexicans Hate Texas Boarders

[Dis]

I can't believe how many people are against illegal immigration here at poly.

First of all lets go over capitalism. I may have left leaning views, but I am a die hard capitalist. I believe in the free market.

Where there is demand, there is supply. There is a demand for low paying jobs, thusly, the supply of illegal immigrants are there to fill those jobs.

I don't blame the mexicans from coming accross. If there were no jobs, they would not have to break the law.

The stupid conservatives say they should do so legally. But under current law that is near impossible. The goverment beauracracy is so bad, that it takes years to get legal permission to work in the U.S. These mexicans don't have this kind of time, they have a family to feed. And secondly, they don't allow enough legal immigrants from mexico. We have more jobs that need to be filled.

I blame the illegal immigration problem solely on the U.S.

[Odin]

Originally posted by Dissident
I can't believe how many people are against illegal immigration here at poly.

First of all lets go over capitalism. I may have left leaning views, but I am a die hard capitalist. I believe in the free market.

Where there is demand, there is supply. There is a demand for low paying jobs, thusly, the supply of illegal immigrants are there to fill those jobs.

I don't blame the mexicans from coming accross. If there were no jobs, they would not have to break the law.

The stupid conservatives say they should do so legally. But under current law that is near impossible. The goverment beauracracy is so bad, that it takes years to get legal permission to work in the U.S. These mexicans don't have this kind of time, they have a family to feed. And secondly, they don't allow enough legal immigrants from mexico. We have more jobs that need to be filled.

I blame the illegal immigration problem solely on the U.S.

Good post Diss. I think it is not economic reasons we limit immigration, it is the rednecky scum racists who are scared of the "brown hoards." and use the "they are stealing our jobs" line as populist ranting and raving to get support for thier racist policies. :vomit:

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Odin


Good post Diss. I think it is not economic reasons we limit immigration, it is the rednecky scum racists who are scared of the "brown hoards." and use the "they are stealing our jobs" line as populist ranting and raving to get support for thier racist policies. :vomit:

Um . . . it's more complex than this oversimplification of the problem.


It's a combination of racism, along with the economic burdens for the parts of the states that are overwhelmed with dealing with illegal immigration.

[Ned]

Dissident, I am a conservative and I am with you. In an earlier post I point out that with green cards the Mexican worker could move up the food chain and get better-paying jobs. Now who would oppose that?

Also, who opposes moving production work to Mexico. Who opposes allowing Mexican truckers who are paid less from driving their loads into the US?

Don't blame conservatives for the oppression of Mexico or the Mexican worker in the United States.

[Dis]

well I won't deny there is a serious economic problem with illegal immigration. Most of of it has to deal with hospital costs. As they don't pay their bills.

My solution is to make legal immigration easier, and thusly you will be able to collect taxes from the immigrants.

[Dis]

plus it would be to our benefit to allow more legal immigration.

We could perfrom background checks on all these people streaming accross the border. Right now, we have no idea who's coming accross. Scary thought.

[SlowwHand]

"I can't believe how many people are against illegal immigration here at poly. "
Makes as much sense as anything said.


And people from Iowa don't know WTF is going on with it.
What, worries over Nebraskans crossing the border?
No! I bet it's that group from Northern Illinois.
Sava and his gang.

[Odin]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
"I can't believe how many people are against illegal immigration here at poly. "
Makes as much sense as anything said.


And people from Iowa don't know WTF is going on with it.
What, worries over Nebraskans crossing the border?
No! I bet it's that group from Northern Illinois.
Sava and his gang.

STFU or you'll have the Minnesota hoards commin' after ya.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Odin


Good post Diss. I think it is not economic reasons we limit immigration, it is the rednecky scum racists who are scared of the "brown hoards." and use the "they are stealing our jobs" line as populist ranting and raving to get support for thier racist policies. :vomit:

Odin, in California, the "racist scum" who oppose legalizing the Mexican worker are the unions. They prefer the current "illegal" status so the undocumented worker cannot challenge the union worker for jobs.

Prop 187, decried by the Mexican-American community, really wanted the US government to help pay for the US-government mandated costs imposed on the California taxpayer by the immigrants. These costs were killing the California budget, forcing taxes ever higher, etc, etc., to pay for social programs for the illegal immigrant who does not pay taxes because they have no Social Security number.

That same let's-get-the-Feds-to-pay banner was raised strongly in the recent debate by none other than the "racist scum" Harrington who said a non Republican was necessary to challenge the Bush regime to get more funding for California.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by SlowwHand

And people from Iowa don't know WTF is going on with it.
What, worries over Nebraskans crossing the border?
No! I bet it's that group from Northern Illinois.
Sava and his gang.

Hey, I agree with this new policy of dropping those illegal immigrants to far-away Mexican towns.

But I also know that our immigration regulations could use some reforming.

[Master Zen]

"stealing our jobs" is utter BS. I'd like to see farm boys volunteer for farm hands. Unemployment is almost always voluntary. There are jobs everywhere, just that not everyone wants them.

Anyway, I think after all these rants and flames a compromise is being reached: Migration would be good if it were legal. So, make it easier for mexican workers to legally enter and work in the US. They will pay taxes which is good, and most of them will leave since they only go to the US to get some $$ to start or help up a small business down here.

Not much different to the proposal our government had about free trade in labor, shame it was brushed away after 9/11. Let them come, work for a few years, save up some cash, pay taxes, and send that money back here until they can be self-sufficient.

Remember the bracero program, was not all that different, and it worked great.

[SlowwHand]

Now look what the Mexicans are trying to pull!

By Richard Cowan

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Tequila, the distilled spirit that fueled a decades-old margarita craze in the United States, has landed squarely in the middle of a trade fight between Mexico City and Washington.

Mexico is threatening to cut off all bulk exports of Tequila, claiming it needs to tighten quality controls on the gold-plated namebrand that is owned by the Mexican government and supposedly assures every bottle's high quality. If enacted, all Tequila would be bottled in Mexico.

Mexico is the only nation that produces the alcohol made from fermented sap from the blue agave plant.

But as is usually in the case with trade fights, there are opposing views. U.S. companies suspect that by banning bulk exports used north of the Rio Grande for individual bottling, Mexico is maneuvering to steal American bottling jobs.

Peter Cressy, president of the Distilled Spirits Council, on Wednesday called Mexico's proposal an "ill-conceived action" in violation of world trade rules.

Another U.S. industry official, who asked not to be identified, bluntly said the Mexican government was trying to "create jobs" by moving American bottling operations south.

In early August, as official Washington was mostly shut down, Mexico previewed a new regulation requiring that all Tequila would have to be bottled before export.

The Bush administration, already reeling from 3.3 million private sector job losses under its watch and sensing the potential loss of bottling plant jobs in California, Arkansas, Missouri and Kentucky, has been in contact with Mexico to protest the move, according to a U.S. Trade Representative's office spokeswoman.

The agency is hoping to head off a late-October official publication of the regulation by Mexico that could go into effect as early as next year.

Allen Johnson, the chief agriculture negotiator for the U.S. Trade Representative, told inquiring senators on Tuesday his agency was still reviewing Mexico's proposed regulations and was working with industry to try to resolve the problem.

Last year, the United States consumed 86.4 million bottles of Tequila, more than half of Mexico's total output. Eighty-three percent was shipped to the U.S. in bulk form and bottled here, according to the U.S. industry.

Mexico's Tequila Regulatory Council challenged the notion that job creation was driving the move to kill bulk exports.

Judith Meza Nixon, U.S.-Canada representative for the council, said there is evidence that handlers of bulk Tequila on both sides of the border could be eroding the drink's quality.

In a telephone interview, she said that some bulk shipments from Mexico turned out to be sugar cane alcohol or grains spirits, instead of Tequila. In other instances, U.S. bottlers were found mixing different types of Tequila together, also in violation of Mexican standards, she said.

If Mexico halts bulk shipments, the government would be "protecting the authenticity of a product," which Nixon argued was within international trade rules.

Frank Coleman, a spokesman for the U.S. distillers, said this trade dispute comes as consumption is skyrocketing. That, he said, was because of American's growing love for premium sipping Tequilas and for Tequila-based drinks.

Without Mexico's bulk Tequila, Cressy said, there is the "significant potential" for shortages.


If Mexico goes ahead with this, the United States eventually could file a North American Free Trade Agreement complaint. For now, both industries are saying they have NAFTA on their side.


-----------------------------------------------------------


Good old NAFTA.
The only thing Clinton did besides get a blow job from his employee.
So everything he had anything to do with, sucked.

[Master Zen]

You friggin drunkards! You drink it more than we do!

Oh well, let NAFTA sort it out. But don't ever complain later that the tequila you buy over there somehow doesn't taste as good

[SlowwHand]

Hey. I have to keep things stirred up.
It's part of the job description.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Master Zen
"stealing our jobs" is utter BS. I'd like to see farm boys volunteer for farm hands. Unemployment is almost always voluntary. There are jobs everywhere, just that not everyone wants them.

Anyway, I think after all these rants and flames a compromise is being reached: Migration would be good if it were legal. So, make it easier for mexican workers to legally enter and work in the US. They will pay taxes which is good, and most of them will leave since they only go to the US to get some $$ to start or help up a small business down here.

Not much different to the proposal our government had about free trade in labor, shame it was brushed away after 9/11. Let them come, work for a few years, save up some cash, pay taxes, and send that money back here until they can be self-sufficient.

Remember the bracero program, was not all that different, and it worked great.

I support this kind of program. It makes sense. Of course, the Democrats will be against it because it inherently lowers labor rates in the US, etc., etc., etc.

It might also be a solution to the millions of "undocumented" workers already in the US.

But, are you sure they all want to return to Mexico? Are there reasons for Mexicans to want to stay in the United States other than economics?